N.C. Marriage Amendment on May's Primary Ballot.

Izdaari said:
Tarheel Baptist said:
http://www2.nbc17.com/news/2012/mar/05/wording-nc-marriage-amendment-released-ahead-may-e-ar-2004973/

It constitutionally defines marriage as between a man and a woman....
What a quaint idea....I'm thinking of voting YES!

Reading the article, it covers not just marriage, but "legal domestic unions". I do not live in NC, but I could not support that.

Homosexual marriage is already illegal in NC....this just goes a step further and adds it to the state constitution.  It's up by 20 points in some polls and I'll vote to support it.

However, it's against God's law no matter how we vote.
 
Tarheel Baptist said:
Izdaari said:
Tarheel Baptist said:
http://www2.nbc17.com/news/2012/mar/05/wording-nc-marriage-amendment-released-ahead-may-e-ar-2004973/

It constitutionally defines marriage as between a man and a woman....
What a quaint idea....I'm thinking of voting YES!

Reading the article, it covers not just marriage, but "legal domestic unions". I do not live in NC, but I could not support that.

Homosexual marriage is already illegal in NC....this just goes a step further and adds it to the state constitution.  It's up by 20 points in some polls and I'll vote to support it.

However, it's against God's law no matter how we vote.

If I understand it correctly, it covers not just same sex marriage, but domestic partnerships. That's going too far. God's law and secular law in a pluralistic society may not, and should not, necessarily be congruent. Remember the 14th Amendment and equal protection under the law.
 
Izdaari said:
Tarheel Baptist said:
Izdaari said:
Tarheel Baptist said:
http://www2.nbc17.com/news/2012/mar/05/wording-nc-marriage-amendment-released-ahead-may-e-ar-2004973/

It constitutionally defines marriage as between a man and a woman....
What a quaint idea....I'm thinking of voting YES!

Reading the article, it covers not just marriage, but "legal domestic unions". I do not live in NC, but I could not support that.

Homosexual marriage is already illegal in NC....this just goes a step further and adds it to the state constitution.  It's up by 20 points in some polls and I'll vote to support it.

However, it's against God's law no matter how we vote.

If I understand it correctly, it covers not just same sex marriage, but domestic partnerships. That's going too far. God's law and secular law in a pluralistic society may not, and should not, necessarily be congruent. Remember the 14th Amendment and equal protection under the law.

Domestic partnerships aren't recognized in NC now.
The 14th amendment was necessary to keep blacks (practically) from being discriminated against....hardly apples and apples.

And, many states that recognize domestic partnerships have been sued by gay couple because they don't recognize gay marriage.
What's next?
Pediphile marriage?
Polygamy legalized?

The 14th amendment applies?!
 
Izdaari said:
I think you will find, if it gets to the SCOTUS, that the 14th Amendment does apply.

Perhaps, IF the make-up of the court changes...but that certainly isnt the arbiter of right or wrong.
And if it does apply, the floodgates will open for all manner of perversions of marriage partnerships...the first will be polygamy...IMHO>
 
Tarheel Baptist said:
Izdaari said:
I think you will find, if it gets to the SCOTUS, that the 14th Amendment does apply.

Perhaps, IF the make-up of the court changes...but that certainly isnt the arbiter of right or wrong.
And if it does apply, the floodgates will open for all manner of perversions of marriage partnerships...the first will be polygamy...IMHO>

I don't think the makeup of the court would necessarily have to change. I am as constitutionally strict as Scalia and Thomas, my two favorite justices, and I can see how it could apply.
 
Izdaari said:
Tarheel Baptist said:
Izdaari said:
I think you will find, if it gets to the SCOTUS, that the 14th Amendment does apply.

Perhaps, IF the make-up of the court changes...but that certainly isnt the arbiter of right or wrong.
And if it does apply, the floodgates will open for all manner of perversions of marriage partnerships...the first will be polygamy...IMHO>

I don't think the makeup of the court would necessarily have to change. I am as constitutionally strict as Scalia and Thomas, my two favorite justices, and I can see how it could apply.

I don't see your two favorite justices voting yoat way on this issue....they dissented on Lawrence vs Texas, I believe.
 
I'm probably in the minority here, but I don't know that I can support it, because of the changes it will make in domestic partnerships and other family situations. If it doesn't pass, nothing really changes, but if it does it will mean a lot of children and other people in those types of situations may lose health insurance coverage.

NC doesn't recognize domestic partnerships as legal marriages, but it does allow individual business and insurance/benefits providers to extend coverage to domestic partners if they choose. This law would apparently prohibit that and would strip families of those benefits if they currently have them. Many companies are opposed to it for this reason, including Duke Energy and several of the tech companies which NC has been trying to attract and have recently moved to our state.

I think homosexuality is a sin and that God does not recognize their unions, even if they wish to call them marriages, but I am a bit uncomfortable trying to write my religious convictions into state law. If we really want to do that, then shouldn't marriage be defined as a union between one woman and man man, who are both Christians and both virgins, and one that cannot be severed except in case of sexual immorality or abandonment. Why just single out the gays, since there are so many other biblical types of marriage?

I asked a similar question on facebook - how many who support the marriage amendment would also support an amendment criminalizing pornography and adultery, in order to protect marriage, and let's just say the response was less than positive.
 
Raine said:
I'm probably in the minority here, but I don't know that I can support it, because of the changes it will make in domestic partnerships and other family situations. If it doesn't pass, nothing really changes, but if it does it will mean a lot of children and other people in those types of situations may lose health insurance coverage.

NC doesn't recognize domestic partnerships as legal marriages, but it does allow individual business and insurance/benefits providers to extend coverage to domestic partners if they choose. This law would apparently prohibit that and would strip families of those benefits if they currently have them. Many companies are opposed to it for this reason, including Duke Energy and several of the tech companies which NC has been trying to attract and have recently moved to our state.

I think homosexuality is a sin and that God does not recognize their unions, even if they wish to call them marriages, but I am a bit uncomfortable trying to write my religious convictions into state law. If we really want to do that, then shouldn't marriage be defined as a union between one woman and man man, who are both Christians and both virgins, and one that cannot be severed except in case of sexual immorality or abandonment. Why just single out the gays, since there are so many other biblical types of marriage?

I asked a similar question on facebook - how many who support the marriage amendment would also support an amendment criminalizing pornography and adultery, in order to protect marriage, and let's just say the response was less than positive.

If we are going to recognize any marriage other than traditional, Biblical marriage, why stop with gay marriage?
Then the question arises, where do you draw the line?
Polygamy? Incestuous?

All law places someone's belief over another's....
 
Raine said:
I'm probably in the minority here, but I don't know that I can support it, because of the changes it will make in domestic partnerships and other family situations. If it doesn't pass, nothing really changes, but if it does it will mean a lot of children and other people in those types of situations may lose health insurance coverage.

NC doesn't recognize domestic partnerships as legal marriages, but it does allow individual business and insurance/benefits providers to extend coverage to domestic partners if they choose. This law would apparently prohibit that and would strip families of those benefits if they currently have them. Many companies are opposed to it for this reason, including Duke Energy and several of the tech companies which NC has been trying to attract and have recently moved to our state.

I think homosexuality is a sin and that God does not recognize their unions, even if they wish to call them marriages, but I am a bit uncomfortable trying to write my religious convictions into state law. If we really want to do that, then shouldn't marriage be defined as a union between one woman and man man, who are both Christians and both virgins, and one that cannot be severed except in case of sexual immorality or abandonment. Why just single out the gays, since there are so many other biblical types of marriage?

I asked a similar question on facebook - how many who support the marriage amendment would also support an amendment criminalizing pornography and adultery, in order to protect marriage, and let's just say the response was less than positive.

I can only speak for myself, but I read the Law of Perfect Freedom, given by God, and I praise Him for His wisdom.

And I read the laws of men who forsake the Law of God and I see only tyranny.
 
Tarheel Baptist said:
Raine said:
I'm probably in the minority here, but I don't know that I can support it, because of the changes it will make in domestic partnerships and other family situations. If it doesn't pass, nothing really changes, but if it does it will mean a lot of children and other people in those types of situations may lose health insurance coverage.

NC doesn't recognize domestic partnerships as legal marriages, but it does allow individual business and insurance/benefits providers to extend coverage to domestic partners if they choose. This law would apparently prohibit that and would strip families of those benefits if they currently have them. Many companies are opposed to it for this reason, including Duke Energy and several of the tech companies which NC has been trying to attract and have recently moved to our state.

I think homosexuality is a sin and that God does not recognize their unions, even if they wish to call them marriages, but I am a bit uncomfortable trying to write my religious convictions into state law. If we really want to do that, then shouldn't marriage be defined as a union between one woman and man man, who are both Christians and both virgins, and one that cannot be severed except in case of sexual immorality or abandonment. Why just single out the gays, since there are so many other biblical types of marriage?

I asked a similar question on facebook - how many who support the marriage amendment would also support an amendment criminalizing pornography and adultery, in order to protect marriage, and let's just say the response was less than positive.

If we are going to recognize any marriage other than traditional, Biblical marriage, why stop with gay marriage?
Then the question arises, where do you draw the line?
Polygamy? Incestuous?

All law places someone's belief over another's....

I'm not sure where you're going with this, unless it's to say you have no problem with theocracy.  :o
 
Izdaari said:
Tarheel Baptist said:
Raine said:
I'm probably in the minority here, but I don't know that I can support it, because of the changes it will make in domestic partnerships and other family situations. If it doesn't pass, nothing really changes, but if it does it will mean a lot of children and other people in those types of situations may lose health insurance coverage.

NC doesn't recognize domestic partnerships as legal marriages, but it does allow individual business and insurance/benefits providers to extend coverage to domestic partners if they choose. This law would apparently prohibit that and would strip families of those benefits if they currently have them. Many companies are opposed to it for this reason, including Duke Energy and several of the tech companies which NC has been trying to attract and have recently moved to our state.

I think homosexuality is a sin and that God does not recognize their unions, even if they wish to call them marriages, but I am a bit uncomfortable trying to write my religious convictions into state law. If we really want to do that, then shouldn't marriage be defined as a union between one woman and man man, who are both Christians and both virgins, and one that cannot be severed except in case of sexual immorality or abandonment. Why just single out the gays, since there are so many other biblical types of marriage?

I asked a similar question on facebook - how many who support the marriage amendment would also support an amendment criminalizing pornography and adultery, in order to protect marriage, and let's just say the response was less than positive.

If we are going to recognize any marriage other than traditional, Biblical marriage, why stop with gay marriage?
Then the question arises, where do you draw the line?
Polygamy? Incestuous?

All law places someone's belief over another's....

I was responding to the post that said we shouldn't  push our religious convictions on another.
I merely pointed out that any law pushes someone's  belief or conviction on another.
Our system of law was initially based on the 10 Commandments.

A yes vote on this amendment is obviously based on my Biblical conviction,but also on history,tradition and morality. A no brainer,if you will....

I'm not sure where you're going with this, unless it's to say you have no problem with theocracy.  :o
 
4everfsu said:
I will vote yes.


As will I.....and the majority of our fellow Tar Heels.

RLS says hi and if women didn't wear pants, this homosexual marriage thing wouldn't be an issue!
 
It may well pass... but by not stopping with the definition of marriage, but continuing on to make it clear the intent is to deny same sex couples equal protection under the law, you guys are setting yourself up to lose in court on 14th Amendment grounds.
 
Izdaari said:
Tarheel Baptist said:
All law places someone's belief over another's....

I'm not sure where you're going with this, unless it's to say you have no problem with theocracy.  :o

Seriously, "All law places someone's belief over another's...." sounds like you're perfectly fine with theocracy. Are you?
 
Izdaari said:
Izdaari said:
Tarheel Baptist said:
All law places someone's belief over another's....

I'm not sure where you're going with this, unless it's to say you have no problem with theocracy.  :o

Seriously, "All law places someone's belief over another's...." sounds like you're perfectly fine with theocracy. Are you?

You mean like sharia law?
If so,no.

Again, someone posted that they had a problem forcing their religious views on others....I point out that all laws that include a restriction of action, forces someone's preference over another's.
From speed limits to prostitution to porn to pediphilia to polygamy....
 
Tarheel Baptist said:
4everfsu said:
I will vote yes.


As will I.....and the majority of our fellow Tar Heels.

RLS says hi and if women didn't wear pants, this homosexual marriage thing wouldn't be an issue!

That was one of his three part in his sermons, pants on women....
 
Back
Top